Sorry I've failed to contribute to the frenzy. I don't like to post to say hey, look at that. I feel like I have to add some value. So I'll just say... what's with the secrecy combined with conspicuousness? The woman's reputation is besmirched by the conspicuous raid, and the governor of our state is collaterally damaged. But she's supposed to keep quiet, why?

"I'm not worried," Archer said. "I don't even have a lawyer. I don't need a lawyer. I did nothing inappropriate."

Why not? The FBI search your house for hours and you don't need a lawyer? Just because you think you've done nothing wrong doesn't mean you don't need a lawyer! Assuming Cynthia Archer is not an idiot, on what theory does she not need a lawyer?

At this point she probably doesn't need an attorney..but she does need some duct tape to keep her pie hole shut w/ the FBI, media, and everyone. She may indeed need an attorney soon..but what I just said is about all an attorney could tell her @ this point and my advice is free!

After the first level of foot stomping and holding of breath, the little children of the Left have graduated to full fledged character assasination (vandalism). They never give up, which is why a larger civil war is coming for the soul of America.

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.

Perhaps the "request" for silence comes not from the investigators, but from the investigatees. Suppose there is something to cover up and the coveruper thinks the best strategy is to appear to have nothing to coverup, and so they want Archer to project that image. She, being a loyal and trusting associate, cooperates.

Since you asked about the theory; for the truly innocent, there is something wrongful about having to hire someone to prove your innocent. Now, I realize to a lawyer, the FBI has to prove your guilty; not you prove your innocence. But if you did nothing wrong, then an innocent's mind is simple: they'll never prove it, so I don't need to do anything else.

There's also the problem of the cost. You might even wonder if the point of the raid is to make it costly for people aiding Walker.

A valid theory would have to be one where finding herself in legal trouble is the least of Archer's worries. Extortion? Blackmail? More likely, she has been assured that she will not be a target if she is cooperative (or, alternatively, she will be vigorously defended if it should be necessary if she plays innocent now) -- but that runs back into the idiot clause. She would have to believe whomever is making the promises.

Well, try this: She's not the target of the investigation, and she's not involved in any way other than she might happen to be in possession of evidence relating to someone else who IS the target of the investigation. But, even with that, she really ought to at least discuss it with a lawyer.

A better (for certain values of "better" having nothing to do with liklihood) theory is that she is deeply involved in high-level corruption and knows that all the attorneys are fatally compromised by past associations. She knows she could use a lawyer, but also knows she can't trust any of them.

well ,whether Archer is guilty or not, she probably doesn't have the legal skills to negotiate the court bureaucracy. Ergo, she needs a Lawyer:"one skilled in the circumvention of the law" as Lt Bierce put it.

Seems like <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/16/scott-walker-cynthia-archer-fbi-raid-wisconsin_n_965899.html> HuffPo</a> has already declared Scott Walker guilty of high crimes so maybe that is why Archer is keeping quiet.

She certainly sounds innocent in her statement for what that's worth. I'm eager to see what comes of it. If this turns out to be some sort of ill-conceived DOJ/FBI Walker-harrasment-by-proxy, then I don't know what to say except that this Administration is fucked up in the head, big time.

Michael: thanks--I am a big fan of Ambrose Bierce--the LT Bierce thing threw me off--Bierce's devils dictionary is a great piece of literature--the other guy I like is HL Mencken--he did have an antisemtic streak but he is still a great essayist.

Roger J: Were I you I would claim relationship with Villa! Arango is not a particularly common name in Mexico, or at least I haven't run across it much if ever. Clearly you are a desperado waiting for a train, perhaps even ready to organize a raid north of the Wolf River, enemy territory.

Michael: again you are correct--the arangos that came from Pravia, in Asturias provice settled in cuba, florida and columbia--my granddad was one of the original cigar manufacturers in Ybor city--had homes in Tampa and Havana, where my dad was born. The name is not prevalent in Mexico

The theory is that she's innocent of any wrongdoing. Unfortunately, in our over legislated country, the odds are wee are all criminals, even garage. The Obama administration has shown a propensity to drum up any and every legal charge it can against Republicans and Republican supporters. Get a lawyer.

DADvocate: Get a lawyer indeed. It is not just this administration, but all of them that seem to think we need more laws. We should quit calling these people lawmakers and compensate them for repealing laws, compensate them bigtime. What if we paid every yes vote to repeal ANY law a million dollars. Do you think we would not be saving vast fortunes in the process? And then all the congress people could be millionairesandbillionaires in the process. win win

We had a 6:30 a.m. raid at my house not too long ago and I will tell you: it's the shits. Armed ICE agents, swarming all over my house. They showed no ID when they came in, nor did they show me the search warrant until after they had "secured the premises." Evidently, shouting "Police! Search warrant!" and scaring the shit out of the homeowner is identification enough.

They have planned long and hard for this, or they couldn't have a dozen agents there at the same time. They did not plan enough to simply stop my husband when he went out to get the mail or mow the yard. No, they planned it carefully so that we were all home, so that Dad's troubles couldn't be kept from the kids. They planned it carefully so that I would need to leave the house to take the kids to school, thereby separating me from my husband. They were very polite, asking to call me by my first name, letting them establish a more intimate feel to their exchanges with me. Bastards.

They plan it all carefully so that the victim-homeowners are so rattled that they can barely remember their names. The Miranda warning? Yeah. But who the hell has a lawyer on speed dial, and who remembers that they should not talk? THAT's how rattled all their careful planning made us. People TALK because they are scared out of their minds, not because they are stupid.

Since this is a federal crime, it sure looks bad, doesn't it? But what made my husband's a federal crime was simply that federal officers did the investigation. The crime itself would be a state crime if the state patrol had done the investigation. The Department of Homeland Security has all kinds of money thrown at it--not for homeland security, but for any kind of crime investigations. Homeland Security is simply a way to fund a police state where the most insignificant action is criminalized. I love George Bush for many reasons but will not forget that he started this.

My husband broke the law. Yes. Do I think that is okay? No, I was horrified. Do I think that a five-year mandatory minimum prison sentence is right? No. Do I think that mandatory minimum sentences are right for any offense? No.

Seems to me that there has been an increasing "militarizatrion" of law enforcement--there is ample evidence of botched raids were family pets are shot, and innocent people are subjected to the scourge of inept law enforcement--the police in these botched raids are protected by sovereign immunity. I see no upside to this type of "law enforcement."

This may be merely an indication of a new "Jobs Program" for under-employed lawyers initiated by the Administration. Get a judge to issue a search warrent, have ICE, Homeland, FBI, ATF, Wildlife, etc. conduct a search of one's home or business, and they have "created" billable hours for a lawyer. Or, in the case of Gibson, a law firm.Thus "saving" several jobs for various agents and "creating" legal jobs. Enough of those actions and the resulting billable hours plus the corresponding overhead billings for staff, paralegals,copying,etc. and the GDP might show an increase in time for the election.

A co-worker of mine (we'll call him Fred) had his house raided by local and state law enforcement a few years ago. They were investigating some illegal downloading (ahem) that had taken place through Fred's internet connection.

Fred gave them access to all of his stuff, and they very quickly determined that it was Fred's next door neighbor, Barney, who had been doing the downloading -- using Fred's wireless.

So these guys told Fred not to mention this investigation to anyone until after they'd taken Barney down; and they came back the next night (probably after obtaining a second warrant) and raided Barney's house.

It could be something that trivial and totally unrelated to Walker.

And even if it is, I'm sure we'll see garage et al make veiled references to this for years afterward.

"what's with the secrecy combined with conspicuousness? The woman's reputation is besmirched by the conspicuous raid, and the governor of our state is collaterally damaged. But she's supposed to keep quiet, why?"

Reminds me of Fitzpatrick discovering early on that the Plame "leak" was Richard Armitage, but telling Powell and Armitage to keep quiet and then continuing the investigation.

A Walker aide has already admitted to sockpuppetry while on the taxpayer dime. Not sure if you knew that.

So garage, since you oppose that, why did you support Wisconsin teachers and university professors politicizing and sockpuppeting while on the taxpayer dime, using school and state email and internet systems?

Oh, that's right. You're a hypocrite. And since you're a hypocrite, no one cares.

Also, why won't you comment on why you abuse women? You stated that a woman cracked a phone across your face; you also stated that women only committed acts of violence when they were abused by men. So why did you abuse women, garage?

Chicken fucking aside, garage, it's a valid point. You didn't have a problem with all those public employees doing their little civil disobedience thingy on the taxpayers back. Not that I recall anyway.

Don't know about Walker, but I believe lying is perfectly fine in certain circumstances. The 9th commandment says, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour." It doesn't forbid lying. It forbids lying about others.

For liberals, lying about others is a given, lying about them being racist, greeedy, stupid, etc. For a liberal to be concerned about someone else lying is morally ludicrous. Liberalism is the great lie of our time and is maintained by lies.

Keep fucking that chicken North Dallas Turd. Or, maybe you're one of Walker's sockpuppets. So hard to tell these days.

Yup. Once again the hypocrite and woman abuser garage demonstrates how Obama Party sockpuppets like himself think they can break whatever law they want.

Answer the question, sockpuppet garage. Who pays you? Why do you support Obama Party members using taxpayer resources for political purposes, as was PROVEN to be being done by Wisconsin teachers and university professors?

Also, garage, why do you abuse women? You admitted that a woman was forced to crack a phone across your face. Was that because you were trying to rape her?

After all, you stated that women NEVER act violently or threateningly unless provoked. You also stated that women only attack those who are abusive or intend to rape them, so clearly the fact that you were attacked proves that you are an abuser or rapist.

Well, if there is a crime here, I certainly hope it's something more substantial than posting web comments from a government computer, because I couldn't see how that would be anything but politically biased prosecution.

I'm referring to public employees taking part in the protests when they were supposed to be at work.

Again, not illegal.

Sofa KingIf you remember in the early 90s, legislators resigned and some went to prison for similiar activities. If anyone was promising quid pro quos from Walker's admiminstration, shit will really hit the fan.

Define sock puppetry as you're using it and explain it's illegality. I was under the impression your problem with it was doing it on the tax payer's dime, not the illegality of it...at least that's what your statement above led me to believe.

In a related vein, you're okay when wasting taxpayer money, then, as long as it's not illegal?

There you go with your lies. That's why you like hiding behind anonymity.

As I said yesterday in reference to Obama, politicians are not to be loved or trusted. I do love how Walker gets under the skin and rankles liberals. I love the exposure of the complete and utter hypocrisy of the left, who claimed to care so much about constitutinal rights and human rights during the Bush years, yet have gladly abandoned and trampled on them during the Obama years.

I sleep with a smile on my face regarding things like this.

I'm not a Wisconite, so I don't think about Walker much, other than when I'm reading this blog.

If you remember in the early 90s, legislators resigned and some went to prison for similiar activities. If anyone was promising quid pro quos from Walker's admiminstration, shit will really hit the fan.

Can you justify the fact that there is evidently no probe into Shelly Moore, who REPEATEDLY used school district emails for her campaign?

So, just to be clear, if a public employee is supposed to be at their work location, you know...working...and they call in sick...but aren't...you're okay with that? That's not abusing a publicly paid position?

Hell, it's abusing a private one. What makes a public employee so special that it's not abuse of trust?

What is the question? What's legal and what isn't? If you are a government employee, politicking, that's illegal. As I mentioned, there was a scandal that rocked the capitol years ago, for the very same thing. Two Democrats went to prison, and some Repubs resigned. Was that investigation politically motivated?

Notice how garage mahal supports and endorses lying and claiming you are sick when you are not for the purpose of defrauding the taxpayers.

Notice how garage mahal repeatedly supports sockpuppeting and use of government email accounts and internet resources to promote Obama Party candidates.

Notice how garage mahal openly supports Obama Party lawmakers and their union thugs threatening retribution against businesses who do not contribute to Obama Party campaigns or do not put signs up in their window showing their support for the union or the Obama Party.

Notice how garage supports and endorses making bomb threats against Republicans and then the Obama Party district attorney refusing to file charges.

And notice how garage refuses to answer why he abused and/or attempted to rape a woman who was forced to crack a phone across his face to make him stop.

Unfortunately, they took fraudulent days and then used doctors, working at taxpayer expense, to defraud the taxpayers.

It is on video, garage. These Obama Party taxpayer-paid doctors from the University of Wisconsin deliberately lied. They did not perform thorough examinations. They colluded to defraud the taxpayers. And they had the full suppport and endorsement of your Obama Party and the politician who pays you to sockpuppet here.

Why do Obama Party state representatives like the one who employs you support defrauding the taxpayers, garage?

Agree she needs a lawyer and Gargae says she has one, so yes why would she lie about it? Why proclamations of innocence, she doesn't need any lawyers because SHE didn't do anything wrong.Unspoken message could be ,"it wasn't I that did the wrongdoing, I am safe here because I am cooperating with this investigation, that's why I don't need a lawyer".

Tell me why would she quit her job, only to be given another position with the State, in which she is getting paid 61% more than her predecessor? Is it possible that Walkers administration wanted to get rid of her because she was the doer of their deeds and they knew she ( and they) were under investigation? If she were a lone wolf doing the deeds, why wouldn't Walkers administration fire her and distance themselves from her and plead that they had no knowledge of her deeds, UNLESS they were trying to kill two birds with one stone, get rid of her and give her another job to keep her from singing like a bird to the Feds.

There is way more to this John Doe investigation than some political crony of Walkers using computers for political purposes on Government time, way more. BTW she is compelled to remain quiet during a John Doe investigation, she MAY already have given testimony and obtained immunity, hence her declaration of innocence. She is not an idiot, I believe she know damn well what she's doing.

Prairie Wind, You have my sympathy and prayers. When I worked the visiting room @ Leavenworth my heart would ache for family members. And, yes..cops can be pricks and love to show force. Waco could have been avoided if they just arrested the suspect in his routine trip into town. However, in that show of force, the ATF got it shoved up their asses. I'm sure ICE agants have cowboy in them..but there are no bigger cowboys than the ATF.

Bender, I am familiar with Waco and Ruby Ridge. I do not think the proliferation of laws making us all criminal started with Bush but the Dept of Homeland Security did, and those are the agents used almost as mercenaries by other LE agencies. That is my understanding of how ICE agents ended up waving guns around in my house, anyway.

Col Mustard, I could have used you that morning. You wouldn't have been worrying about the dog and the kids and the husband and could have kept your head better.

Garage most of the information you pointed out today, is a valid counter point to the some of the comments, and not sabotage. Our recent history shows that two Dems went to jail over issues very similar to what this Walker aid, and perhaps others I did during the Milwaukee campaigns. But rather than jump to conclusions let us watch Justice work.

"I did think they were going to shoot our dog, and it was not funny. A dozen armed ICE agents invaded my home...for a non-violent crime. There is something wrong with that."

Prairie Wind, for what it's worth, I hope you and the kids are all right and about this I agree with you completely. There is no excuse for needlessly bringing a spouse, kids and dogs into an arrest. For one thing, it's your home and you've a right to an expectation of security there, and people get crazy about their children's safety. Spouses may try to protect each other. It's got to be the most volatile possible situation that must put everyone in additional risk of injury, including the agents, and the chance of trauma for the kids is 100%.

There is no excuse at all not to deliberately arrange to arrest someone away from their children if at all possible.